lgbtq the sims video games The Sims 4 Is Going Gender Neutral in a Big Way, Removing All Gender Restrictions in the Game
Via: @SimsVIP
  • -
  • Vote
  • -

EA Games and Maxis are ending all gender restrictions in the latest version of The Sims 4. According to Associated Press, over 700 pieces of content were locked based on gender before this change. That includes hairstyles, clothing and voice options and apparently a lot more. 

Maxis worked with LGBTQ advocacy group GLAAD on the update. The game mechanics as well as the cosmetics of characters will be a little more gender fluid. Now characters can look however players choose AND change gender at any time and decide whether they can reproduce with other characters or not. Gender symbols will also be removed from the game's gallery feature. 

So far, the response has been mostly positive: 


via @tha_rami, @JamesTurnerYT, @Campster@BeaTheCraftian

surgeon-simulator-donald-trump-edition-video-games-weird
Via: Bossa Studios
  • -
  • Vote
  • -

Annd now the fate of the likely Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, virtually rests in your hopefully (or not?) steady hands.



You can gain access to Trump's surgical table either of these ways:

  1. If you own Surgeon Simulator, upgrade to the Anniversary Edition ($3)
  2. If you don’t own Surgeon Simulator, buy the Anniversary Edition ($13)
winning-cosplay-overwatch-video-games-tasha-mercy
Via: Atreides27
  • -
  • Vote
  • -

First off, well done to Tasha on the impeccable cosplay, yet again. Second, a shoutout to Redditor Fangs4u for the headline!

Via: Recode
  • -
  • Vote
  • -

Alrighty then Mr. Musk, alrighty then. Here's Musk's argument in full:

"The strongest argument for us being in a simulation probably is the following. Forty years ago we had pong. Like, two rectangles and a dot. That was what games were.

Now, 40 years later, we have photorealistic, 3D simulations with millions of people playing simultaneously, and it's getting better every year. Soon we'll have virtual reality, augmented reality.

If you assume any rate of improvement at all, then the games will become indistinguishable from reality, even if that rate of advancement drops by a thousand from what it is now. Then you just say, okay, let's imagine it's 10,000 years in the future, which is nothing on the evolutionary scale.

So given that we're clearly on a trajectory to have games that are indistinguishable from reality, and those games could be played on any set-top box or on a PC or whatever, and there would probably be billions of such computers or set-top boxes, it would seem to follow that the odds that we're in base reality is one in billions.

Tell me what's wrong with that argument. Is there a flaw in that argument?

There's a one in billions chance we're in base reality. Arguably we should hope that that's true, because if civilization stops advancing, that may be due to some calamitous event that erases civilization. So maybe we should be hopeful this is a simulation, because otherwise we are going to create simulations indistinguishable from reality or civilization ceases to exist. We're unlikely to go into some multimillion-year stasis.

I've never been so sold on what originally seemed an alarmingly outlandish take on, well, life?